Re: MySQL Power ?
On Friday 05 April 2002 11:32, Steve Rapaport wrote: I'm currently running MySQL for a big, fast app without problems. BUT: I'm in the middle of specifying a new application with a high load, and I'm consideing looking for alternatives to MySQL because without InnoDB, it gets really slow on tables with frequent updates and reads (no row locking). We have, for example, a session table that records all the incoming requests for holding state. Since it's constantly being updated and read, it is frequently locked, and there are often instances where 50 reads will stack up while a lock is held. This slows down the whole database. Only if you insist on locking your tables. If you're talking about a webapp, Apache only really will be servicing 1 request at a time, generally. I have yet to be forced to lock my session table. Maybe you rely too much on this one table? Also you might try using a HEAP table for session state. Its much much faster if you can afford the memory (but again, keep your session state small and simple!). With InnoDB, I'm sure this problem goes away, but as soon as we go to InnoDB, we have to pay for backups and support, which means we start looking around at 'pay' solutions. I guess I don't understand why you see InnoDB as being more expensive than using standard myisam. Its just a table handler, there are not that many fundamental differences in how things work, and 99% of the existing MySQL infrastructure works fine with any table type. Backups are pretty basically the same as ever, just back up the tablespaces! Admittedly they use the disk a bit different, but it has caused us no real problems. Is there something I'm missing? Steve However, my impression is that while the answer, for the very highest volumes, is that Oracle is better, the point at which Oracle betters MySQL is *much* higher than doubters might think. So, if anybody give the reply that Oracle is best at the high end, please could they also try to quantify the point at which MySQL begins to run out of steam - and what it is it can't do and Oracle can at that point. (For example, MySQL can handle high read loads by use of replication, but would bottleneck on high write loads - I think). - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: MySQL Power ?
From: Richard Spangenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] Can mySQL handle... ...as well as Oracle. MySQL is different than the big databases like Oracle, Informix, etc. MySQL is comparatively small and fast, also cheap. As such, it doesn't come with all of the bells and whistles that others might. You may not need built-in tools like clustering when you see the relative cost. For instance, if you have to pay $50,000 to get an Oracle solution to a problem, or could use MySQL and spend $10,000 on in-house programming for that solution, which is better? --- Rodney Broom - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: MySQL Power ?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't mean to start an opinion war, but ... Can mySQL handle many processors, many servers (clustering), load ballancing, etc as well as Oracle. Or should one use Oracle (some other database) for large volume high response requirements. Is mySQL too basic for these capabilities? Pros and Cons, please. This should help settle an internal debate that is raging! Something from the MySQL front page: http://www.eweek.com/article/0,3658,s=708a=23115,00.asp -- John Klein, Database Applications Developer | Omnia Mutantur, Systems Group - Harvard Law School | Nihil Interit - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: MySQL Power ?
I don't mean to start an opinion war, but ... Can MySQL handle many processors, many servers (clustering), load ballancing, etc as well as Oracle. Or should one use Oracle (some other database) for large volume high response requirements. Is mySQL too basic for these capabilities? Pros and Cons, please. This should help settle an internal debate that is raging! I will look forward to hearing the response of the well-informed to this. However, my impression is that while the answer, for the very highest volumes, is that Oracle is better, the point at which Oracle betters MySQL is *much* higher than doubters might think. So, if anybody give the reply that Oracle is best at the high end, please could they also try to quantify the point at which MySQL begins to run out of steam - and what it is it can't do and Oracle can at that point. (For example, MySQL can handle high read loads by use of replication, but would bottleneck on high write loads - I think). (Or have I just fallen for Oracle propaganda?) Alec Cawley - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: MySQL Power ?
Actually, according to the objective eWeek test results at the link provided in another reply, the gap between Oracle 9i and MySQL 4.x is rather slim... I will look forward to hearing the response of the well-informed to this. However, my impression is that while the answer, for the very highest volumes, is that Oracle is better, the point at which Oracle betters MySQL is *much* higher than doubters might think. So, if anybody give the reply that Oracle is best at the high end, please could they also try to quantify the point at which MySQL begins to run out of steam - and what it is it can't do and Oracle can at that point. (For example, MySQL can handle high read loads by use of replication, but would bottleneck on high write loads - I think). (Or have I just fallen for Oracle propaganda?) Alec Cawley - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: MySQL Power ?
For what a newbies opinion may matter, I breifly worked with Oracle, and am working with MySQL. Fact, as it may be, I will never look for or take a job where they are using the P.O.S. Oracle. Oracle is not stable enough, it bombs if you make one misleading query. MySQL just says eh, try again. Heaven forbid you want to call a memory stack in Oracle and puipe the results to the db, and if you do, you had better have all of your ducks squared away, you can ever so easily corrupt the database if you don't. Oracle doesn't have enough intuition either. John -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 9:16 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MySQL Power ? I don't mean to start an opinion war, but ... Can MySQL handle many processors, many servers (clustering), load ballancing, etc as well as Oracle. Or should one use Oracle (some other database) for large volume high response requirements. Is mySQL too basic for these capabilities? Pros and Cons, please. This should help settle an internal debate that is raging! I will look forward to hearing the response of the well-informed to this. However, my impression is that while the answer, for the very highest volumes, is that Oracle is better, the point at which Oracle betters MySQL is *much* higher than doubters might think. So, if anybody give the reply that Oracle is best at the high end, please could they also try to quantify the point at which MySQL begins to run out of steam - and what it is it can't do and Oracle can at that point. (For example, MySQL can handle high read loads by use of replication, but would bottleneck on high write loads - I think). (Or have I just fallen for Oracle propaganda?) Alec Cawley - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: MySQL Power ?
I'm currently running MySQL for a big, fast app without problems. BUT: I'm in the middle of specifying a new application with a high load, and I'm consideing looking for alternatives to MySQL because without InnoDB, it gets really slow on tables with frequent updates and reads (no row locking). We have, for example, a session table that records all the incoming requests for holding state. Since it's constantly being updated and read, it is frequently locked, and there are often instances where 50 reads will stack up while a lock is held. This slows down the whole database. With InnoDB, I'm sure this problem goes away, but as soon as we go to InnoDB, we have to pay for backups and support, which means we start looking around at 'pay' solutions. Is there something I'm missing? Steve However, my impression is that while the answer, for the very highest volumes, is that Oracle is better, the point at which Oracle betters MySQL is *much* higher than doubters might think. So, if anybody give the reply that Oracle is best at the high end, please could they also try to quantify the point at which MySQL begins to run out of steam - and what it is it can't do and Oracle can at that point. (For example, MySQL can handle high read loads by use of replication, but would bottleneck on high write loads - I think). - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: MySQL Power ?
just wanted to add another category of comparison: mysql is fast, reliable and scalable. that's a fact! we don't need to discuss this anymore. BUT: the sql-set is too limited for most of the real use cases out there. just think of the missing sub-selects or multitable-updates/deletes or stored procedures. i worked with m$ sqlserver and oracle for years and i really miss these features in mysql. i am looking forward to see version 4.x having these things. mysql rocks and oracle is really expensive :) so i continue using mysql for almost all projects. cheers, pero -Original Message- From: john [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 6:25 PM To: MySQL Lists Subject: RE: MySQL Power ? For what a newbies opinion may matter, I breifly worked with Oracle, and am working with MySQL. Fact, as it may be, I will never look for or take a job where they are using the P.O.S. Oracle. Oracle is not stable enough, it bombs if you make one misleading query. MySQL just says eh, try again. Heaven forbid you want to call a memory stack in Oracle and puipe the results to the db, and if you do, you had better have all of your ducks squared away, you can ever so easily corrupt the database if you don't. Oracle doesn't have enough intuition either. John -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 9:16 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MySQL Power ? I don't mean to start an opinion war, but ... Can MySQL handle many processors, many servers (clustering), load ballancing, etc as well as Oracle. Or should one use Oracle (some other database) for large volume high response requirements. Is mySQL too basic for these capabilities? Pros and Cons, please. This should help settle an internal debate that is raging! I will look forward to hearing the response of the well-informed to this. However, my impression is that while the answer, for the very highest volumes, is that Oracle is better, the point at which Oracle betters MySQL is *much* higher than doubters might think. So, if anybody give the reply that Oracle is best at the high end, please could they also try to quantify the point at which MySQL begins to run out of steam - and what it is it can't do and Oracle can at that point. (For example, MySQL can handle high read loads by use of replication, but would bottleneck on high write loads - I think). (Or have I just fallen for Oracle propaganda?) Alec Cawley - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: MySQL Power ?
Agreed. As soon as subselects and the Stored Procedure support is complete I can almost ditch MSSQL entirely... BUT: the sql-set is too limited for most of the real use cases out there. just think of the missing sub-selects or multitable-updates/deletes or stored procedures. i worked with m$ sqlserver and oracle for years and i really miss these features in mysql. i am looking forward to see version 4.x having these things. mysql rocks and oracle is really expensive :) so i continue using mysql for almost all projects. cheers, pero -Original Message- From: john [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 6:25 PM To: MySQL Lists Subject: RE: MySQL Power ? For what a newbies opinion may matter, I breifly worked with Oracle, and am working with MySQL. Fact, as it may be, I will never look for or take a job where they are using the P.O.S. Oracle. Oracle is not stable enough, it bombs if you make one misleading query. MySQL just says eh, try again. Heaven forbid you want to call a memory stack in Oracle and puipe the results to the db, and if you do, you had better have all of your ducks squared away, you can ever so easily corrupt the database if you don't. Oracle doesn't have enough intuition either. John -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 9:16 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MySQL Power ? I don't mean to start an opinion war, but ... Can MySQL handle many processors, many servers (clustering), load ballancing, etc as well as Oracle. Or should one use Oracle (some other database) for large volume high response requirements. Is mySQL too basic for these capabilities? Pros and Cons, please. This should help settle an internal debate that is raging! I will look forward to hearing the response of the well-informed to this. However, my impression is that while the answer, for the very highest volumes, is that Oracle is better, the point at which Oracle betters MySQL is *much* higher than doubters might think. So, if anybody give the reply that Oracle is best at the high end, please could they also try to quantify the point at which MySQL begins to run out of steam - and what it is it can't do and Oracle can at that point. (For example, MySQL can handle high read loads by use of replication, but would bottleneck on high write loads - I think). (Or have I just fallen for Oracle propaganda?) Alec Cawley - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: MySQL Power ?
why do you have to pay? I was under the impression innodb was free as well... -Original Message- From: Steve Rapaport [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 April 2002 08:33 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: MySQL Power ? I'm currently running MySQL for a big, fast app without problems. BUT: I'm in the middle of specifying a new application with a high load, and I'm consideing looking for alternatives to MySQL because without InnoDB, it gets really slow on tables with frequent updates and reads (no row locking). We have, for example, a session table that records all the incoming requests for holding state. Since it's constantly being updated and read, it is frequently locked, and there are often instances where 50 reads will stack up while a lock is held. This slows down the whole database. With InnoDB, I'm sure this problem goes away, but as soon as we go to InnoDB, we have to pay for backups and support, which means we start looking around at 'pay' solutions. Is there something I'm missing? Steve However, my impression is that while the answer, for the very highest volumes, is that Oracle is better, the point at which Oracle betters MySQL is *much* higher than doubters might think. So, if anybody give the reply that Oracle is best at the high end, please could they also try to quantify the point at which MySQL begins to run out of steam - and what it is it can't do and Oracle can at that point. (For example, MySQL can handle high read loads by use of replication, but would bottleneck on high write loads - I think). - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: MySQL Power ?
Steve, With InnoDB, I'm sure this problem goes away, but as soon as we go to InnoDB, we have to pay for backups and support, which means we start looking around at 'pay' solutions. I must correct that MySQL technical support is not free, whether you use InnoDB or not. Note also that mysqldump and other GPL tools work also with InnoDB tables. Is there something I'm missing? Steve Regards, Heikki Tuuri Innobase Oy - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: MySQL Power ?
At 10:16 AM 4/5/2002, you wrote: Actually, according to the objective eWeek test results at the link provided in another reply, the gap between Oracle 9i and MySQL 4.x is rather slim... Gregory, A point that was sadly missing from that article was what was the cost to create the Oracle webserver? How much did it cost to purchase the Oracle software and how much were the license fees to support that many concurrent users. How much was the administration software for the Oracle database? What was the yearly support for tech support? What did it cost for tech support (in hours) to fine tune the database? Then compare those figures to MySQL and you'll start to see the real advantage of MySQL. If anyone has these costs worked out for the Oracle vs MySQL webserver benchmark that appeared in e-Week and PC Mag, I think a lot of people would be interested in seeing it. I know I would. Brent I will look forward to hearing the response of the well-informed to this. However, my impression is that while the answer, for the very highest volumes, is that Oracle is better, the point at which Oracle betters MySQL is *much* higher than doubters might think. So, if anybody give the reply that Oracle is best at the high end, please could they also try to quantify the point at which MySQL begins to run out of steam - and what it is it can't do and Oracle can at that point. (For example, MySQL can handle high read loads by use of replication, but would bottleneck on high write loads - I think). (Or have I just fallen for Oracle propaganda?) Alec Cawley - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
RE: MySQL Power ?
At 10:16 AM 4/5/2002, you wrote: Actually, according to the objective eWeek test results at the link provided in another reply, the gap between Oracle 9i and MySQL 4.x is rather slim... Gregory, A point that was sadly missing from that article was what was the cost to create the Oracle webserver? How much did it cost to purchase the Oracle software and how much were the license fees to support that many concurrent users. How much was the administration software for the Oracle database? What was the yearly support for tech support? What did it cost for tech support (in hours) to fine tune the database? Then compare those figures to MySQL and you'll start to see the real advantage of MySQL. If anyone has these costs worked out for the Oracle vs MySQL webserver benchmark that appeared in e-Week and PC Mag, I think a lot of people would be interested in seeing it. I know I would. Brent Agreed, but the article was solely about the technical merits of the various solutions. FYI (general consumption), both Sybase and MySQL sent people to the test floor, IBM provided email support, Oracle and Microsoft declined to be involved. I would say that the lower TCO of MySQL compared to Oracle would be a deciding factor in many cases (given a relatively equivalent feature set). Don't get me wrong; I'm certainly not an Oracle schill. I harbor a deep and ancestral hatred for Oracle's database server software, especially from an admin standpoint. I was simply highlighting the fact that in plain technical terms, MySQL was right there with Oracle, and far and above the other offerings. Anything on top of that (the TCO issues you raise, for example) are above and beyond that. I have to admit that I have not yet tried the .NET/OLEDB interfaces to MySQL, and honestly, am not willing to until the SP support in MySQL is fully functional. I will say that all of the VS/ADO/.NET development I am doing for IIS/MSSQL is being done with an emphasis on easily migrating to MySQL in the future (for example, making sure that I don't use any Microsoft-specific constructs on the database side). Why am I still working with MS technologies? Because they work together well (as the article also stated), and at this time I am more interested in shorter development time (which VS.NET provides in spades) than in purity of ideology. VS.NET/IIS/.NET Framework/MSQQL 2K works fine for me for now, but as soon as I can plug in MySQL on the back end without missing a beat I'm there. - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
Re: MySQL Power ?
On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Steve Rapaport wrote: On Friday 05 April 2002 06:37 pm, andy thomas wrote: On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Steve Rapaport wrote: With InnoDB, I'm sure this problem goes away, but as soon as we go to InnoDB, we have to pay for backups and support, which means we start looking around at 'pay' solutions. Why do you suddenly have to pay for backups and support? We have to pay for backups because backing up an Innodb table and restoring it reliably is not a simple matter of locking the table and copying the files, like in a MyISAM table. To do it reliably it looks to me like you'll need Heikki's InnoDBHotCopy module, which costs money. mysqldump works fine with Innodb although this may not be the complete answer in your case if you have a busy database. We have to pay for support for a similar reason: We're using replication for failover, and I've already had cases where replication fails for one reason or another. In these cases, recovering replication was tedious but possible. Reading through the manual for Innodb it looks (actually looked, it's changed for the better lately) like this would become hellish and unlikely to succeed. So I'd be paying for support to keep replication working, I think. I've not used replication yet so I can't really comment on this aspect. OK, point taken. cheers, Andy - Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
